About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)
the years before obama. no regulations on wall street. it's very worrisome. i think obama is doing the right thing trying to regulate especially on wall street, because wall street is a funding tunnel of getting money out of this country and not taxing the rich. host: money is in oklahoma, republican. good morning. caller: the man before me was just on the talking points of the democrats. the vice-president does not make a difference to me. but the president does. when this man obama gets in there again, people are going to suffer. hen hea terrible thing wen wants us to be a third world country and the like all the rest of the countries. we're not like all the rest of the country's. we fought not to be like all the rest of the countries. the polls are skewed. they did not ask me. there are plenty of other people they did not ask either. so there are plenty of people who will vote for romney. he will be surprised when that day comes. host: thanks for calling. lots of financial stories in the papers today. the front page of the new york times this morning has the story about the payroll tax. t
settled down and stabilized and there is more political consensus. look at what the obama administration is doing right now. it's not that different from what the bush administration did throughout its to terms, especially at the end. given that there is that consensus, that is one of the recent national security is not an issue. it's also why some things are a little more litigious in the national security area. >> this will be the last question. >> any predictions for retirement? >> i need it will depend on who the next president is. obviously we have several justices who are getting older, but i think most of them would feel if they were voluntarily retiring and not forced to do so by health concerns or other circumstances, the honorable thing to do is retiring during the term of the party that a plea to do in the first place. you could seek justice ginsburg -- i think she is trying to make a record for how long she is staying on the court. if president obama is there, we may see her retire. you may see scalia or kennedy retire if we have a president romney. it makes a huge shift in t
it. we have five minutes. we can negotiate a deal right here. do you favor the plan, senator obama? senator mccain, are you in favor of this plan? >> we have not seen the language yet. i think there is constructive work being done out there for the viewers who are watching. i am optimistic. the question i think we need to ask ourselves is how did we get into this situation in the first place? two years ago, i warned that because of the relaxed regulation, we would potentially have a problem in trying to stop the abuses and mortgages that were taking place at the time. last year, i wrote to the secretary of treasury to make sure he understood the magnitude of this problem and to call on him to bring all the stakeholders together to try to deal with it. the question i think we have to ask ourselves is yes we have to solve this problem short term. we will have to intervene. there is no doubt about it. but we will also have to look at how is it that we have shredded so many regulations, we did not set up a 21st century regulatory framework to deal with these problems, and that is in pa
situation that is simply unsustainable and frankly, next year is the big window we have. right after the election, the first-year, either romney's first year or obama, who will never run for reelection again, so people will not have to worry about it. this will be the window to cut the budget in some significant way, or at least have an outline for cutting the budget, and reform the tax system in some kind of significant way. the question is, will it be the big picture reforms we need or will it be a 12-month solution? but they will have to do something that will hurt. i hate to say that. >> hurt everybody? >> yes. the only reason i would hesitate is that probably at the bottom of the income scale, he'd make sure they are not hurt. >> what would you say to someone watching the elections and listening to the candidates, and they all promise that if you elect me, everything will be fine? it happened four years ago. >> it happened eight years ago, 12 years ago, 14 years ago. everybody is not at the point to be fine. what i hope will happen is that we will have shared sacrifice. everyone
think neither candidate right now has a comprehensive plan that leads the six principles we're talking about. president obama does not really have a plan because his plan is his budget but his budget was rejected unanimously by the senate and house in the last two years so he has to start over again. mitt romney has a plant -- p lan he has not provided enough specifics and some of the specifics, the numbers did not at that. that is why it is critically important for both to be most pacific -- more specific, more solutions oriented in the debate so we can make an informed choice about who to support and they can claim they have a mandate. the people can then be involved to help get a fiscal burden next year. it is critically important. >> will you be watching the presidential debates? >> yes, i watched them. >> as you watch them and have watched them and you recall your own participation 20 years ago, what do you think about when you see these debates that have happened since then? >> not much. [laughter] this maneuvering back and forth. that is what i would call it. >> last question --
. look what happened the first two years -- even though it took obama two years to get the healthcare through, they still had everything right there. unless you have a complete representative, you know, in there that represents everyone and just not one side, like all progressives or all republicans, you don't have those checks and balances, whether it's the legislative, judicial, presidency, whatever. you need -- the bottom line -- you know, there's one problem on this whole thing. obama is not a politician. i mean, he cannot negotiate. reagan was in there. he had a democrat in congress, and he was able to negotiate like several people. obama can't do that. he goes out there and says, hey, this is my bill. he doesn't know how to negotiate. host: thanks for calling. in "the wall street journal" this morning, making a difference is their headline. romney campaign seeks to portray tough and nice image. obama team aims to avoid a gaffe. they write -- host: back to the phones. linda on our line for democrats, calling from florida this morning. go ahead, linda. caller: i believe in a one-p
anything to get into the race cycle with obama and romney? host: what do you say? guest: right now i'm excluded from the first debate. the commission is the presidential debate commission and that is private and made up of republicans and democrats with no interest in seeing a third voice on stage. we have filed three lawsuits to get me on stage based on other third-party candidates who have filed lawsuits. there doesn't seem to be much hope. we filed on the antitrust round, something that has not been done before. host: how much do these debates matter and what are you looking for to hearing on wednesday? guest: the debates are tantamount to me having a chance of winning. you can close the lid on winning the election. is winning getting enough votes to cause one of the other two who ends up winning to give more than just lip service to these issues? potentially. i view this as a victory every single day. there are so many people -- i think i speak on behalf of the majority of americans. i think they consider themselves fiscally responsible and socially respecting. i am in that broad
. "the new york times" rights abroad this, the continuity about obama and bush, for that matter. they only changed things 10 degrees one way or the other. there will be some issues. obviously, there's no question that romney takes a different view on how to deal with russia. on iran, it's harder call, for instance. maybe you're going to get to this eventually, -- >> we are only 25 minutes in. i consider it to be an on unreasonable possibility regardless of who is in the white house that the united states might end up engaging in military action with iran, what will that do to all of these consensuses about spending and whether american people are injected in foreign policy and issues like the defense budget? as issues like that and the ones we do not even know about that make me wary of all of these straight line projections we're making in the future of based on what things look like right now. >> which point? >> any of them. but i meant the one about iran and the likelihood we would enter into that regardless of who wins. what's right now, it's not clear to me. >> question fro
me add another thought -- if obama, in fact, continues where he is now and wins the election, i think there is a very good chance that the republican party could split in half. you might have a far right party, a tea party, let's say, and a more moderate centrist republican party that might appeal to certain centrist democrats. i think it is possible if the election ends up where it is now that there would be a third party in our future. it would be similar to the election of 1860 where the democratic party split over the issue of slavery with the northern democratic party and a southern democratic party and that is the first time the republicans won national office with lincoln. a similar think it happen this time. if mitt romney wins, they will stick together, obviously. if they do not win, i think there is a chance that the republicans could come apart at the seams. host: this is a hypothetical because the polls indicate it will happen but of one party or the other were to gain the white house, the house, and the senate, would that be better? could we get more done as a country? gu
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10 (some duplicates have been removed)